10th January 2012, 10:42 PM
Fair play Kev.
Another rationalisation would be to say that if a project is going ahead, no matter how contentious it might be, it's best that a good a job of mitigating adverse impacts on 'heritage assets' is carried out. And who better to do it than us, eh? :-) That's helped me sleep when working on greenfield sites, roads and burial grounds in the past. I'd still much rather work on renewables, rail etc. though.
Another rationalisation would be to say that if a project is going ahead, no matter how contentious it might be, it's best that a good a job of mitigating adverse impacts on 'heritage assets' is carried out. And who better to do it than us, eh? :-) That's helped me sleep when working on greenfield sites, roads and burial grounds in the past. I'd still much rather work on renewables, rail etc. though.